LGBTQ+ Discrimination Attorneys in Washington, D.C.
Proudly Standing Up for LGBTQ+ Workers’ Rights in in D.C. & Chicago, IL
Employment law has made huge strides when it comes to the rights of LGBTQ+ employees. Unfortunately, many employers still discriminate against members of this community. It often takes aggressive legal representation to protect your rights. At Clark Law Group, this is exactly what we provide.
Since 2007, we have stood up for workers who face discrimination of any form, including discrimination based on:
- Sexual orientation
- Gender identity
- Expression of gender
We have offices in Chicago and Washington, D.C. and serve clients throughout the nation. Whether it takes tireless negotiation with your employer or a civil lawsuit, we will help you put an end to discrimination and recover the compensation you deserve.
Examples of LGBTQ+ Discrimination
Workplace harassment and discrimination can take many forms, some more overt than others. Far too many people report experiencing hostile work environments due to their sexuality or gender identity.
At Clark Law Group, some of the most frequent examples we see include:
- Homophobic or offensive jokes
- The display of offensive material
- Refusal to hire LGBTQ+ workers
- Unwanted romantic advances or touching
- Withheld pay
- Denial of promotions
- Wrongful demotion
- Wrongful termination
- Threats of harm
We will not let your employer get away with treating you unfairly. Our team will take you through the steps necessary to hold the perpetrators accountable and seek compensation.
LINCOLN-ODUMU V. MEDICAL FACULTY ASSOCS.
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88659 (D.D.C. July 8, 2016) Holding that the D.C. Wage Payment Collection Law protects employees of DC employer who are dispatched outside of DC to telework from home.
JAFARI V. OLD DOMINION TRANSIT MANAGEMENT CO.
462 Fed.Appx. 385 (4th Cir. 2012) Holding that an employee’s intracompany complaint may constitute protected activity within meaning of FLSA’s anti-retaliation provision.
FRANCOIS V. OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION
1601-0007-18 (D.C. Office of Employee Appeals, July 18, 2019) Denying OSSE’s petition to review the AJ’s ruling that OSSE did not have requisite cause to remove the complainant employee from her employment.
CONGRESS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
324 F.Supp.3d 164 (D.D.C. 2018) Holding that employee stated claims of disability discrimination and retaliation.
CHURCHILL V. PRINCE GEORGE’S CTY. PUB. SCH.
No. PWG-17-980, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197713 (D. Md. Dec. 1, 2017) Holding that the employee stated a claim of sexual orientation discrimination, sex stereotyping discrimination, and retaliation.